Government forgets stimulating North-East, Sikkim and J & K (See 'Common Basket');

RBI allows benefits to exporters on overdue export bills;

DLF reportedly joins list of developers who are not keen to pursue SEZ development;

Govt to amend Emigration Rules to make recruitment more stringent;

PPPAC gives nod to 21 NHAI projects worth Rs 28302 Cr ;

Govt gives nod to OVL to participate in Imperial bid;

Rajiv Mathur, 1972 batch IPS of UP Cadre, appointed as new IB Director; Bihar Governor given addl charge of Jharkhand;

North East story.pdf

Government forgets stimulating North-East, Sikkim and J & K;

Rupee Export Credit Interest Rates.pdf

Rupee Export Credit Interest Rates – Interest on overdue export bills

Priority Sector Lending.pdf

Priority Sector Lending – Loans to Housing Finance Companies (HFCs)

rbi08cir039.pdf

Buyback / Prepayment of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCBs) ;

mbuzz1236.pdf

Govt to amend Emigration Rules to make recruitment more stringent;

mbuzz1235.pdf

PPPAC gives nod to 21 NHAI projects worth Rs 28302 Cr ;

2008-TIOL-224-SC-IT.pdf + sc it story.pdf

DCIT Vs State Bank Of India (Dated: December 3, 2008 )

Income tax - Securities scam - Special Court set up - Harshad Mehta, main accused, properties attached - tax liability - settlement of tax dues has priority over other dues - banks file application - Special Court scales down tax liability of Mehta and directs Income tax department to deposit Rs 546 Cr with Custodian - Revenue challenges scaling down of tax liability - Held, the taxes due have been ascertained and arrived at in terms of the provisions of the Act and that the banks have failed to establish by producing the relevant documents on record that the said amount, which is decreed in favour of the bank, has been wrongly included in the income of the notified party for the statutory period. As the priority in payment of tax liability under Section 11 (2)(a) is only for the statutory period and not for any other period, the Revenue is justified while contending that if the banks have a right, title or interest in the attached property on the date of the notification under Section 3 of the Act for which decrees have been obtained and if the banks are claiming that the said amount has wrongly been included in the income of the notified party for the statutory period, then the banks are required to show the nexus between the said decreed amount and the amount which is included in the income of the notified party for the statutory period. The matter remanded to the Special Court : SUPREME COURT;

2008-TIOL-608-ITAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Covansys (India) Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, Chennai (Dated: May 14, 2008 )

Income tax - Sec 10B - assessee is into export of software - incurs telecommunication and software delivery charges outside India - AO reduces it from export turnover as well as total turnover - CIT(A) invokes Sec 263 and raises objection on deduction from total turnover and finds that AO has not applied Sec 14A for huge income earned through dividends - Held, since the assessee had claimed huge deduction of an item from total turnover, the AO should have discussed its admissibility in details which it did not. Similarly, the AO merely accepted the assessee's claim that it incurred no 'direct expenses' to earn dividend income. Logically the AO should have looked into any indirect expenses incurred for the same which could have been disallowed u/s 14A. Since non-application of mind on part of AO is prejudicial to the interest of revenue, the invocation of Sec 263 is justified - Assessee's appeal dismissed: CHENNAI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-607-ITAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Transocean Offshore Deep Water Drilling Inc Vs ACIT, Dehradun (Dated: October 24, 2008 )

Income tax - Sec 44BB - assessee is a non-resident company - engaged in exploration of mineral oils - reimbursement of expenditure related to catering, supply of materials and customs duty - assessee accepts that all expenditures reimbursed except the Customs duty are includible in the receipts taxable u/s 44BB - assessee argues that reimbusement for customs duty does not fall within the receipts contemplated under the provisions of law - Held, Customs duty is a liability on importer which is ONGC in this case but the same was paid by the assessee which was later reimbursed and is not taxable u/s 44BB - Revenue's appeal partly allowed

Assessee earnes interest on refund received from income tax - AO treats it as income from other taxes and levies 41% tax - assessee claims benefits under DTAA - Held, the assessee is liable to tax under Article 11 of Indo-USA treaty, and AO directed to charge 15% rate - assessee's appeal allowed: DELHI ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-2013-CESTAT-AHM.pdf + parle story.pdf

M/s Parle Products Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Rajkot (Dated: November 17, 2008)

Notification 39/2001-CE - One who committed breach of the conditions of the Notification is not entitled to blame the other party to the transactions - Tribunal allows appeal by majority.

Notification 39/2001 CE – Self-credit taken in the PLA can be utilized for payment of duty in the manner specified in rule 8 in the subsequent months and such payment shall be deemed to be payment in cash.

The discrepancy has occurred on account of utilization of the same towards payment of service tax on GTA services instead of utilizing the same for payment of excise duty. The said discrepancy was detected by the appellants themselves, who paid the service tax on GTA services by cash. Such subsequent payment of tax duty in cash would result in reversal of debit entry made in the credit account and correction of record. The credit when taken was admissible and was not irregular.

There is consensus on the point that exemption Notifications have to be strictly construed and that conditions attached thereto have to be strictly complied with. But this strictness is of universal application in the sense that it is applicable to the Revenue as well.

As the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner did not determine the amount correctly refundable and intimate the same to them, the assessee was not in a position to do their part. It was as late as on 30.06.2006 that the Central Excise Officer intimated the excess amount of credit to the assessee. By that time, the assessee had already paid equivalent amount towards service tax on GTA service. If the above Notification is strictly construed, the relevant condition was violated by the Revenue. One who committed breach of the conditions of the Notification is not entitled to blame the other party to the transactions.

Entire case of the Revenue is on the premise that the appellants committed breach of conditions of Notification No.39/01-CE and hence they should pay back the entire amount of duty, of which credit had been taken in PLA under para 2A of the Notification. This case of the Revenue can hardly be sustained inasmuch as the assessee's breach, if any, was occasioned by the breach of procedure committed by the Central Excise Officer.

By majority decision the order of the Commissioner(A) is set aside and the appeal is allowed in its totality. : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2012-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE & CC, Surat Vs M/s Nemlaxmi Books (India) Pvt Ltd (Dated: October 27, 2008)

Central Excise - Letter of Undertaking in Form UT-1 is valid for export of all excisable goods i.e. dutiable as well as exempted goods - Validity of LUT cannot be restricted for export of exempted goods i.e. goods attracting "nil" rate of duty in the Central Excise tariff – When there is delay in sanction of rebate interest is payable : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-2011-CESTAT-BANG.pdf + C-DAC story.pdf

M/s Centre For Development Of Advanced Computing Vs CC & CCE ,(Appeals-II) Hyderabad (Dated: October 21, 2008)

Service tax – Commercial coaching or training service – C-DAC is engaged in advanced research in computing and imparting advanced courses in computing & IT – Cannot be equated to coaching institutes imparting coaching for competitive examinations, spoken English etc – Organization without any profit motive do not come in the ambit of ‘commercial coaching or training service' – Impugned order has no merits and liable to be set aside : BANGALORE CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2010-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CCE, Jalandhar Vs M/s Sharma Travel (Dated: August 13, 2008)

ST - Air Travel Agent - cancellation of tickets - assessee adjusts the service tax paid on cancelled tickets against its service tax liability - Revenue disallows - Commissioner(A) sets aside the demand - Revenue alleges unjust enrichment - Held, since the tickets have been cancelled, and the assessee has not passed on the incidence of tax on any other person, Commissioner(A) order upheld : DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2009-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Harish Aneja & Others Vs CCE, Meerut-II (Dated: October 14, 2008)

ST - C&F Service - assessee enters into an agreement with a country liquor manufacturer - undertakes transportation of liquor from factory to depot and then to retailers, maintains the depot and also collects sale proceeds - it is not a fit case for total waiver of pre-deposit - Rs 20 lakh pre-deposit in addition to the sum deposited ordered : DELHI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2008-TIOL-2008-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

CCE, Mangalore Vs M/s Yenepoya Minerals & Granites Ltd (Dated: August 21, 2008)

Customs – Earlier order of Tribunal allowing depreciation and de-bonding in terms of Development Commissioner's order unchallenged – Revenue cannot resurrect and seek to appeal against Commissioner's order already set aside by Tribunal : BANGALORE CESTAT;